Bruno

Yes.

Bruno is the raunchiest R rated movie I've seen. I understand that it originally received an NC-17 and I'm having a hard time imagining what was cut to give it the R.

I'm telling you to see it because it's funny, but this is much less satirical than Borat was. In Borat, Sacha Baron Cohen's character was a foreigner that was in no way, shape, or form an accurate depiction of what people from Khazakstan are actually like. What made the movie so shocking was the fact that Americans completely bought into the fact that a modern Khazaki(?) didn't know how to use a toilet, would carry a rooster in a bowling bag, and would wash his clothes in the Hudson river. The intolerance of Americans shone through like a beacon to xenophobes, racists and homophobes. The movie wasn't antisemitic, the Americans in the movie and in the theatre watching, agreeing with the the concepts in the movie are antisemitic.

The problem with Bruno is that while Borat was seemingly never intended to mock foreigners, Bruno is mocking homosexuals to a certain extent. The stereotypes of foreigners were not accurate, but in order to fully embarrass his victims, Bruno is an overexaggeration of gay stereotypes that, while I do believe that it's OK to laugh at...



... I also think it might be setting the "gay movement" back some by giving homophobes, and even rational minded heterosexuals reason to look at people like Bruno and think that that's how gay people really are.



I liked watching Bruno, it was funny and shocking, but I do think that this one was much more scripted than Borat. Also, I don't care one way or the other about offending anyone, whether the be straight or gay. I think I was just expecting a more innocent "fun-poking" (no pun intended) of American intolerance. Instead, this time we got people giving honest, appropriate reactions to inappropriate behavior.